Democrats Reopen Special Interest Money Spigot

Only eight years ago, Democratic legislators were patting themselves on the backs for enacting the strongest campaign finance laws in the country — reforms that created a firewall between lobbyists, state contractors and state politicians and siphoned much of the special interest money out of Connecticut's political system.

With the end of the 2013 session, Democrats deserve a swift kick in the pants (and dresses) for having broken that firewall, ensuring that special interest money will once again flow into party coffers.

In watering down the state's public financing system, some might say Democrats were responding to the U.S. Supreme Court's boneheaded ruling in the 2010 Citizens United case. The narrowly divided court decided that to restrict campaign spending is to restrict free speech and therefore such a limitation is unconstitutional. That decision allowed corporations and wealthy individuals to pour unlimited amounts of money into elections — in secret and without any accountability. And it generated outside spending that left candidates for public office vulnerable to and in fear of Super PACs and certain tax-exempt nonprofits spending massive amounts in campaigns.

In what has amounted to a campaign finance nuclear arms race, state legislators have struck back, asserting that they need more money — a whole lot more — to counter the mega-millions in independent expenditures that threaten their stranglehold on office.

Thus, the Connecticut House and Senate, both acting appropriately in the dark of night, passed a 98-page bill that will undermine some of the reforms that they championed in 2005. All indications are that Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy was part of the negotiations that weakened the bill and will sign the measure.

Let's be clear about what the bill does. It maintains the Citizens' Election program, which is extraordinarily important. It keeps the ban on contributions from state contractors, despite efforts by some to undo that prohibition. And it adds a dollop of transparency by requiring the disclosure of independent expenditures. It contains, however, provisions that exempt certain nonprofit organizations from some of the disclosure, which makes no sense because groups such as Crossroads GPS and Americans for Prosperity on the right and the Planned Parenthood on the left are some of the biggest outside spenders.

The bill also allows candidates to raise funds for certain nonprofit organizations and Super PACs — which are supposed to be independent from candidates they support — as long as those entities don't publicly announce that they are going to engage in outside spending. Once they do so, candidates can no longer raise funds for them — but those Super PACs can use that money for their so-called "independent" expenditures.

But here's where the firewall becomes a burning ember. Under the bill, the spending limits imposed on state party committees are eliminated. The bill also doubles the contribution that individuals can give to political parties from $5,000 to $10,000 and the amount that a person can give to a town committee from $1,000 to $2,000. In addition, it raises the amount an individual can give to special interests from $750 to $1,000.

In essence, special interests can again make their influence felt by channeling large amounts of money to the parties which, in turn, pass along the contributions to candidates.

Democratic lawmakers are correct when they say that this is a time of new challenges in elections. But Connecticut needs to update, not hack away at the landmark Citizens' Election program. The best way to combat mega-donations and prevent candidates from becoming beholden to wealthy interests is to allow parties and candidates to raise additional small contributions from individuals and get a multiple match for those contributions. Connecticut needs strong disclosure requirements for outside spenders and clear and strengthened rules to prevent candidates and special interest funders of "independent expenditures" from coordinating their activities.

For eight years, Connecticut could rightfully boast that it had repaired a corrosive system, one that undermined the public trust and that legislators had enacted a public financing system that state residents could be proud of. Corrupticut is not a nickname to be proud of.

Cheri Quickmire is executive director of Common Cause in Connecticut based in Hartford. Michele Jacklin is a member of the Common Cause in Connecticut board of directors.